Organizational Legitimacy Under Conditions of Complexity: the Case of the Multinational Enterpris

Topics: Legitimation, Environment, Cognitive psychology Pages: 54 (11577 words) Published: November 3, 2012
Organizational Legitimacy under Conditions of Complexity: The Case of the Multinational Enterprise
Author(s): Tatiana Kostova and Srilata Zaheer
Reviewed work(s):
Source: The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 24, No. 1 (Jan., 1999), pp. 64-81 Published by: Academy of Management
Stable URL: .
Accessed: 07/05/2012 03:36
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact

Academy of Management is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Academy of Management Review.

I Acadenmy of Management Review
1999, Vol. 24. No. 1, 641- 1.

University of South Carolina, Columbia
University of Minnesota
We examine organizational legitimacy in the context of the multinational enterprise (MNE).After discussing three types of complexity (of the legitimating environment, the organization, and the process of legitimation) that MNEs typically face, we explore their effects on MNE legitimacy. In particular, we distinguish between the legitimacy of the MNE as a whole and that of its parts, and we develop propositions that include issues of internal versus external legitimacy and positive and negative legitimacy spillovers.

It has become a growing industry to critique Nike
globally (Phil Knight, NBC Today Show, May 11,

a whole or at its subunits? What constitutes the
legitimating environment of an MNE operating
in multiple institutional environments? What is
the relationship between the overall legitimacy
of the MNE and the legitimacy of its subunits?
And, finally, why do MNEs find it so difficult to
establish and maintain legitimacy and so often
experience crises of legitimacy?
Research on organizational legitimacy (e.g.,
D'Aunno, Sutton, & Price, 1991; Dowling & Pfeffer, 1975; Meyer & Scott, 1983; Scott, 1987, 1995) provides us with a theoretical foundation on
which to examine these questions. Scholars
have defined organizational legitimacy as the
acceptance of the organization by its environment and have proposed it to be vital for organizational survival and success (Dowling & Pfeffer, 1975; Hannan & Freeman, 1977; Meyer & Rowan, 1977). Institutional theorists have identified some of the determinants of organizational legitimacy and the characteristics of the legitimation process (Meyer & Rowan, 1977; Powell & DiMaggio, 1991; Scott, 1995; Selznick, 1957;

Zucker, 1983), citing three sets of factors that
shape organizational legitimacy: (1) the environment's institutional characteristics, (2) the organization's characteristics, and (3) the legitimation process by which the environment of the organization

builds its perceptions
(Hybels, 1995; Maurer, 1971).
In this article we suggest that examining the
MNE case can potentially extend theories of organizational legitimacy since the MNE chal-

One of the critical issues faced by multinational enterprises (MNEs) involves the establishment and maintenance of legitimacy in their multiple host environments. Instances of legitimacy problems in MNEs abound, ranging from censure of MNEs in the global media, such as

that faced by Nike for its labor practices in Asia
(Maitland, 1997; Marshall, 1997), to direct attacks
on MNE operations, such as the destruction of
Cargill's facilities in India (Dewan, 1994). In an
even more extreme example, Shell was accused
of conspiring with the...

References: Aldrich, H., & Fiol, C. M. 1994. Fools rush in? The institutional
context of industry creation
Ashforth, B., & Gibbs, B. 1990. The double-edge of organizational legitimation. Organization Science, 1: 177-194.
Baron, D. 1994. Integrated strategy: Market and nonmarket
Bartlett, C. 1986. Building and managing the transnational:
The new organizational challenge
Bartlett, C., & Ghoshal, S. 1991. Global strategic management: Impact on the new frontiers of strategy research.
Fombrun, C., & Shanley, M. 1990. What 's in a name: Reputation building and corporate strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 33: 233-258.
Baum, J., & Oliver, C. 1991. Institutional linkages and organizational mortality. Administrative Science Quarterly,
36: 187-218.
Galbraith, J. 1973. Designing complex organizations.
Behrman, J. N., & Grosse, R. 1990. International business and
governments: Issues and institutions
Gersick, C. 1990. Revolutionary change theories: A multilevel exploration of the punctuated equilibrium paradigm. Academy of Management Review, 31: 9-41.
Berger, P., & Luckman, T. 1967. The social construction of
Ghoshal, S., & Bartlett, C. 1990. The multinational corporation as an interorganizational
Boddewyn, J. 1995. The legitimacy of international-business
political behavior
Carroll, G., & Hannan, M. 1989. Density dependence in the
evolution of populations of newspaper organizations.
Covaleski, M., & Dirsmith, M. 1988. An institutional perspective on the rise, social transformation, and fall of a
Hannan, M., & Carroll, G. 1992. Dynamics of organizational
populations: Density, competition, and legitimation.
Hannan, M., & Freeman, J. 1977. The population ecology of
D 'Aunno, T., Sutton, R., & Price, R. 1991. Isomorphism and
external support in conflicting institutional environments: A study of drug abuse treatment units
Hybels, R. C. 1995. On legitimacy, legitimation and organizations: A critical review and integrative theoretical
Deephouse, D. 1996. Does isomorphism legitimate? Academy
of Management Journal, 39: 1024-1039.
Hymer, S. 1960. The international operations of national
Dewan, M. 1994. Patent pending: Indian farmers fight to
retain freedom of their seeds
DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. 1983. The iron cage revisited:
Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in
Dowling, J., & Pfeffer, J. 1975. Organizational legitimacy: Social values and organizational behavior. Pacific Sociological Review, 18: 122-136.
Doz, Y. 1986. Government policies and global industries. In
Doz, Y., & Prahalad, C. K. 1980. How MNCs cope with host
government intervention
Dunning, J. H. 1993. Multinational enterprises and the global
Evan, W., & Freeman, E. 1988. A stakeholder theory of
Kantian capitalism.
Continue Reading

Please join StudyMode to read the full document

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Case Study: Organizational Behavior Essay
  • legitimacy Essay
  • Organizational Culture Essay
  • Essay about Environmental Complexity
  • Case Study Under Armour Essay
  • Under Armour Case Anylasis Essay
  • Case Study Under Armour Essay
  • Under Armor Case Essay

Become a StudyMode Member

Sign Up - It's Free